NationStates Jolt Archive

Took only one day (http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/13767738.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nation)


One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn't mean it literally.

What the president meant, they said in a conference call with reporters, was that alternative fuels could displace an amount of oil imports equivalent to most of what America is expected to import from the Middle East in 2025.
But America still would import oil from the Middle East, because that's where the greatest oil supplies are.

The president's State of the Union reference to Mideast oil made headlines nationwide Wednesday because of his assertion that "America is addicted to oil" and his call to "break this addiction."

Bush vowed to fund research into better batteries for hybrid vehicles and more production of the alternative fuel ethanol, setting a lofty goal of replacing "more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025."

He pledged to "move beyond a petroleum-based economy and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past."
Not exactly, though, it turns out.

"This was purely an example," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said


Camelot!


Camelot!


Camelot!


It's only a model...

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

Did the puppeteers not like that then?

Sorry.

I could almost respect him if he did this but nevermind..

you mean that think he got a call or two from the House of Saud (and a few old Texas fishin' buddies) shortly after the speech?




Nahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...... couldn't be.......

Bush has always had bad Writers (everybody knows that) but who ever messed up here deserves to get Sacked/Fired.

He has Properly scared the crap out of the Saudi's because the US is their biggest buyer of Saudi Oil and when they stop buying theres no need for so much protection in the Region!

Bush has always had bad Writers (everybody knows that) but who ever messed up here deserves to get Sacked/Fired.

He has Properly scared the crap out of the Saudi's because the US is their biggest buyer of Saudi Oil and when they stop buying theres no need for so much protection in the Region!


Actually, Bush has had some pretty good writers - it used to be his ability to deliver them that caused all the problems. And I WILL credit him for getting better at delivering the speeches over the past few years.


He's come a long way from OBGYN's "practicing their love" all across the country.... :D

*snip*

Break this addiction etc. etc......

but you can't sign the Kyoto protocols. :headbang: :headbang:

D1ck Head, absolutely 100% pure nonsensical policy bu11sh1t. :mad:

who runs the USA? people, president, or power companies? :confused:

god, this depresses me :(

I'm still waiting on the human-animal hybrids, myself.

Hey, it's not Big Oil's problem that all of these alternative energy thingies need another 30 years of research....

I mean, it's not like he could reduce any oil use by starting to go ahead with any existing technology is it? You know - just offer up a simple tax rebate to any schmuck who sticks a solar panel on their roof?

And it's not like any plans to help with public transit infrastructure would help out would it?

OR tax incentives to actuall USE public transit?



Nahhhhhhhhhhhh. It just needs more research!

Oh yeah, and nuclear power plants. Need lots more of those. Fuck - EVERYONE should have one in their back yard!


Now then, on to the next subject:

Iran.....

Since people are still talking about this alternative crap, it's a moot point anyway.

Break this addiction etc. etc......

but you can't sign the Kyoto protocols. :headbang: :headbang:

D1ck Head, absolutely 100% pure nonsensical policy bu11sh1t. :mad:

who runs the USA? people, president, or power companies? :confused:

god, this depresses me :(

I wouldn't sign the Kyoto protocols either. They're completely ridiculous. Treating China as if its a developing country, when they're turning into one of the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters is laughable. There's no way I would allow the United States to hold itself to a higher standard than some of our biggest competitiors.

We have to break the addiction, and Bodman is, in my opinion, doing a disservice to his boss by trying to back off what he said. There's no reason why we can't reduce our dependency on Middle Eastern oil as Bush said - we can focus on domestic production, like opening ANWR, and on mending fences with oil producers in other regions instead. At the same time, get the energy companies to dump some of their profits into advanced R&D to develop alternative fuels (which they can make money on) to reduce our need for oil.

It's not that difficult a concept, and it bothers me that they aren't going to stick to it. It's reasonable and attainable.

Maybe he was aiming his comments at Canada, rather than the middle east?
"We don't want your oil reserves any more than we want to pay a reasonable price for your lumber. Sell it to China, see if we care. We'll research alternative energy sources instead. Nerny nerny ner ner."

Maybe he was aiming his comments at Canada, rather than the middle east?
"We don't want your oil reserves any more than we want to pay a reasonable price for your lumber. Sell it to China, see if we care. We'll research alternative energy sources instead. Nerny nerny ner ner."

Hey, I'd be more than happy to have Canada curtail oil exports, build up the refining infrastructure, and become totally energy-self-sufficient and away from the whims of the world market.

Can you say...flip flopping?

I thought that George Bush was supposed to represent a solid and determined government which sticks to it's guns.

Maybe that's only when those guns are aimed at arabs ;)

I'm still waiting on the human-animal hybrids, myself.

They're on the way!;)

Palo Alto, CA (LifeNews.com) -- A Stanford researcher has received initial permission to create a human-mouse hybrid as long as the creature acts like a mouse and not like a human being. The researcher hopes to use the studies to learn more about various diseases that plague humans. (http://www.lifenews.com/bio699.html)

Goddammit.

George Bush is his own worst enemy. If the Democrats could ever get their shit together, they'd be running Washington by now.

It's almost depressing that they can't outfox this guy. Almost.

When I heard that addicted to oil/alternative fuels research crap, I said to myself, oops, Karl Rove might have gotten a bit ahead of himself there. Nice to have a new happy-talking-point to yabber on about in the future tense while distracting the nation from the real failures going all around us -- but this? You had to know this back-pedal was coming.

They're on the way!;)

Palo Alto, CA (LifeNews.com) -- A Stanford researcher has received initial permission to create a human-mouse hybrid as long as the creature acts like a mouse and not like a human being. The researcher hopes to use the studies to learn more about various diseases that plague humans. (http://www.lifenews.com/bio699.html)
So, no Stuart Littles driving around in sports cars, then?

Hey, I'd be more than happy to have Canada curtail oil exports, build up the refining infrastructure, and become totally energy-self-sufficient and away from the whims of the world market.
Surely, stopping exporting most of the electricity your hydro electric plants generate down south would have more impact on that than stopping importing oil?

Hey, it's not Big Oil's problem that all of these alternative energy thingies need another 30 years of research....

I mean, it's not like he could reduce any oil use by starting to go ahead with any existing technology is it? You know - just offer up a simple tax rebate to any schmuck who sticks a solar panel on their roof?

And it's not like any plans to help with public transit infrastructure would help out would it?

OR tax incentives to actuall USE public transit?



Nahhhhhhhhhhhh. It just needs more research!

Oh yeah, and nuclear power plants. Need lots more of those. Fuck - EVERYONE should have one in their back yard!


Now then, on to the next subject:

Iran.....
FLASHBACK------Jimmy Carter passed these tax incentives. Everyone in the nation was insulating. putting in tankless water heaters. putting solar panels on the roof, etc.

Reagan said this was an "unfiar tax advantage fot those who could afford houses". It was one of the first tax breaks he removed in his "tax reform". Remember who his VP was...........

Surely, stopping exporting most of the electricity your hydro electric plants generate down south would have more impact on that than stopping importing oil?

Well, there are diferent elements of energy self-sufficiency. Currently Canada produces more oil than we use domestically, but we don;t do much refining - so we sell crude on the world market and buy refined on the world market. From the oil and gas perspective - we could become self-sufficient fairly easily.

Electricity is a whole lot different what with the interconnectedness of the grid.

Now a lot of the electricity we export is superfluous to our current needs in Eastern Caanda, and as much of it comes from renewable sources such as hydroelectric, there is no value to scaling back output when there is revenue to be gained. Where other regions of the country may still need supplemental electical generation it is just as easy to buy from the US if it is available.

So, nationalizing our oil while keeping the North American electric grid still functioning would always be an option. I mean - if you really don't WANT our oil as you suggested.... ;)

Surely, stopping exporting most of the electricity your hydro electric plants generate down south would have more impact on that than stopping importing oil?
Actually, exporting the hydro electricity and then importing a equal number of electricity from the states generate profit. We sell at a higher cost than we buy.

Unfortunately, hydro electricity cannot fuel cars, ships and planes yet. So we must deal in oil too.

Actually, Bush has had some pretty good writers - it used to be his ability to deliver them that caused all the problems. And I WILL credit him for getting better at delivering the speeches over the past few years.


He's come a long way from OBGYN's "practicing their love" all across the country.... :D

here's a general peeve/question:

Obstetrics & Gynecology

how did this come to be referred to with the acronym O.B.G.Y.N.?

wouldn't it make more sense to call them Ob-Gyns?

The proper acronym for the job would be O.G. -- O for Obstetrics, G for Gynecology.

So what could O.B.G.Y.N. stand for?

The possibilities are endless. I'll mention one:

Old Boys Grabbing Your Nugs

hehe

Well, there are diferent elements of energy self-sufficiency. Currently Canada produces more oil than we use domestically, but we don;t do much refining - so we sell crude on the world market and buy refined on the world market. From the oil and gas perspective - we could become self-sufficient fairly easily.

Electricity is a whole lot different what with the interconnectedness of the grid.

Now a lot of the electricity we export is superfluous to our current needs in Eastern Caanda, and as much of it comes from renewable sources such as hydroelectric, there is no value to scaling back output when there is revenue to be gained. Where other regions of the country may still need supplemental electical generation it is just as easy to buy from the US if it is available.

So, nationalizing our oil while keeping the North American electric grid still functioning would always be an option. I mean - if you really don't WANT our oil as you suggested.... ;)
I'm not an American, Silliopolous. They definitely want it: the spectacle of Condolezee Rice moaning that a deal with the American Government was as good as gold was hilarious.

Canuck, this is unfortunately true. I just wonder if extracting and refining the stuff from under the North sands would be any cheaper than importing refined oil is at the moment as you'd need to build up most of the machinery and social infrastructure to do so. (That said, it would create jobs if nothing else, and that's always worth pursuing.)

I'm not an American, Silliopolous. They definitely want it: the spectacle of Condolezee Rice moaning that a deal with the American Government was as good as gold was hilarious.

Canuck, this is unfortunately true. I just wonder if extracting and refining the stuff from under the North sands would be any cheaper than importing refined oil is at the moment as you'd need to build up most of the machinery and social infrastructure to do so. (That said, it would create jobs if nothing else, and that's always worth pursuing.)

Good luck building the refineries.

If you guys have half as much trouble with the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard), BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) and NOPE (Not On Planet Earth) crowds as we have in trying to build new refineries, you'll be in good shape.

People bitch and gripe that gas prices are too high, yet they don't realize that we've not built a refinery in America since the 70s. What do you expect when you're constantly operating at 110% capacity?

FLASHBACK------Jimmy Carter passed these tax incentives. Everyone in the nation was insulating. putting in tankless water heaters. putting solar panels on the roof, etc.

Reagan said this was an "unfiar tax advantage fot those who could afford houses". It was one of the first tax breaks he removed in his "tax reform". Remember who his VP was...........

Yep. Possibly the only good thing Carter ever did, and Reagan reverses the trend back to foreign oil as soon as he takes office. As far as I'm concerned, that was an example of a medocre Presidnt(Carter)at his bes and a decent President(Reagan) at his worst. Who knows what our energy situation would be like if Carter's alternative energy incentives had remained in place.

Good luck building the refineries.

If you guys have half as much trouble with the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard), BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) and NOPE (Not On Planet Earth) crowds as we have in trying to build new refineries, you'll be in good shape.

People bitch and gripe that gas prices are too high, yet they don't realize that we've not built a refinery in America since the 70s. What do you expect when you're constantly operating at 110% capacity?

Yeah, therein lies the problem. No nuclear plants, no oil refineries, no offshore oil platforms, no offshore fishing establishments, etc, etc, etc.

Just because it might affect the environment doesn't mean it will, but a lot of people don't seem to understand this.

I, for one, would be thrilled to have a nuclear plant in my backyard. They look cool.

Can you say...flip flopping?

I thought that George Bush was supposed to represent a solid and determined government which sticks to it's guns.

Maybe that's only when those guns are aimed at arabs ;)
uhm ...

George W. Bush:
"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." —Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." —Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002
-
"Can we win? I don't think you can win it." —after being asked whether the war on terror was winnable, "Today" show interview, Aug. 30, 2004

"In this different kind of war, we may never sit down at a peace table," he said. "But make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win." - Aug. 31, 2004
-


“We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories … And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." —Washington, D.C., May 30, 2003

"Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere!" —President George W. Bush, joking about his administration's failure to find WMDs in Iraq as he narrated a comic slideshow during the Radio & TV Correspondents' Association dinner, Washington, D.C., March 24, 2004



--
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/30/politics/main639576.shtml

Yep. Possibly the only good thing Carter ever did, and Reagan reverses the trend back to foreign oil as soon as he takes office. As far as I'm concerned, that was an example of a medocre Presidnt(Carter)at his bes and a decent President(Reagan) at his worst. Who knows what our energy situation would be like if Carter's alternative energy incentives had remained in place.

LG, you of all people should give honourable mention to Carter's interest in extraterrestrial issues, and his public stance on them and Blue Book.

this man is human. it is only human to contradict ourselves at times. however, since bush is president, he is seen by many as being above human, therefore not allowed to make any mistakes

this man is human. it is only human to contradict ourselves at times. however, since bush is president, he is seen by many as being above human, therefore not allowed to make any mistakes
You haven't been paying attention. He sees himself that way, and declares so publicly on occasion.


"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job." —to a group of Amish he met with privately, July 9, 2004

GW COntradicts Himself

Who cares. Saying the Pres. has contradicted himself is like saying the Bibe Contradicts itself. Even if its true its been said so many times nobody cares anymore.

and in this case the Pres didn't even contradict himself, his Energy Minister contradicted him.

Anyway, based on current trends in alternative fuel, HWether the MInister of energy w\says so or not, America will no longer be dependent on Oil for energy by around 2020-2030. Of course, Petroleum is still nice to have, what for plastic and road tar and what not, so we'll still be importing until the stuff runs out, just that if the Mid east tries to cut us off after then, it won't matter so much.

this man is human. it is only human to contradict ourselves at times. however, since bush is president, he is seen by many as being above human, therefore not allowed to make any mistakes

I think the problem is that during 2004 that was one of the mayor points made against Kerry from the Bush admin. (eg Iraq-war)

I think the problem is that during 2004 that was one of the mayor points made against Kerry from the Bush admin. (eg Iraq-war)

wrong-o-mundo

kerry was never constant in his beliefs and thinkings. bush is constant, except in some rare instances

wrong-o-mundo

kerry was never constant in his beliefs and thinkings. bush is constant, except in some rare instances
You don't know either of them well enough to qualify that statement, and i'm sure there are more than enough other posters who would like to see you prove otherwise. Tick-tock.
You might get some help ... but it won't help reinforce YOUR perspective.

You don't know either of them well enough to qualify that statement, and i'm sure there are more than enough other posters who would like to see you prove otherwise. Tick-tock.
You might get some help ... but it won't help reinforce YOUR perspective.

actually, he reminds me of me. i change my mind with respect to things as he does. i would not make a good president

actually, he reminds me of me. i change my mind with respect to things as he does. i would not make a good president
You know what, from your statement, i ALREADY have the impression you would make a better president than him. One of his biggest problems IS his inflexibility until getting caught.

You know what, from your statement, i ALREADY have the impression you would make a better president than him. One of his biggest problems IS his inflexibility until getting caught.

by the way, by saying that, i do not mean that i change my mind on the large topics (gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc.). it is the smaller issues that i go back on

for example, i always wondered why Bush seems not to care about the environment (which is exaggerated by the press by the way), and then i realized that it might be because some people have taken this energy-conservation to a whole new level, to one in which it is worshipped; to one in which we dont enjoy the environment, but the environment enjoys us.

dont take this the wrong way, if there were two things, in which one would harm the environment more, id go with the one which would hurt it less. however, i try not to "worship" it and see it as a god

by the way, by saying that, i do not mean that i change my mind on the large topics (gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc.). it is the smaller issues that i go back on

for example, i always wondered why Bush seems not to care about the environment (which is exaggerated by the press by the way), and then i realized that it might be because some people have taken this energy-conservation to a whole new level, to one in which it is worshipped; to one in which we dont enjoy the environment, but the environment enjoys us.

dont take this the wrong way, if there were two things, in which one would harm the environment more, id go with the one which would hurt it less. however, i try not to "worship" it and see it as a god
I think the environment thing is in stages. By almost all accounts of people who are qualified in the pertinent fields, rampant consumerism and uncontrolled population growth tie together in ways that end up costing the environment, and the tip of the spear now is the issue of how much carbon emissions (that are directly involved with the attitude of lifestyle that is employed by people who DON'T give enough of a f*ck about the consequences) play into a huge and relatively rapid and painful re-organization of life on earth. As for Bush, regardless of how he actually feels, he doesn't stray IN THE SLIGHTEST from corporate directive. That in itself is going to keep him in the pocket of people who don't feel they'll profit from any endorsement of environmental responsibility.
As far as it being a god, there are several decent arguments in the affirmative.

People bitch and gripe that gas prices are too high, yet they don't realize that we've not built a refinery in America since the 70s.

Or buy fuel efficient cars. I mean COME ON! it SAVES MONEY and still people wont do it, whilst complaining about paying to much for petrol.

Hey, it's not Big Oil's problem that all of these alternative energy thingies need another 30 years of research....


Actually, they don't. The only thing stopping Wind energy (which IS just about as competitive now) and Solar (which is closing the gap regardless of how cute it is for you to suggest it isn't) from taking over in the 70's was that oil prices lowered again. Oil has pushed them down and out, but it can't do that forever.

Also, if investments in wind were financed with the same confidence as those for oil, wind prices would be cut in half, but there is a "risk" still associated with it. If it even got a remotely solid share of the energy market wind prices would shoot down and become viable.

wind and solar? Not even a little bit, both require more land than is practical, both have serious maintenance issues, and both are seriously innefficient, Oil proces had nothing to do with it, they were only even close to competitive in the seventies because of hyperinflation and serious oil shortages.

Now, Hydrogen is only 5 years out from commercial viability, and then maybe another ten years for marketing to take hold and then at most another ten years of buildup and hydroge could easily conquer the market.

Nuckearpower WOULD be even closer but we'd have to shoot all the environuts first to keep them from blocking that like they've been for the last thirty years (The idiots).

wind and solar? Not even a little bit, both require more land than is practical, both have serious maintenance issues, and both are seriously innefficient, Oil proces had nothing to do with it, they were only even close to competitive in the seventies because of hyperinflation and serious oil shortages.

Now, Hydrogen is only 5 years out from commercial viability, and then maybe another ten years for marketing to take hold and then at most another ten years of buildup and hydroge could easily conquer the market.

Nuckearpower WOULD be even closer but we'd have to shoot all the environuts first to keep them from blocking that like they've been for the last thirty years (The idiots).
And where are ya gonna put all the nuclear wastes? You can't recycle it and make it non-radiated.
No one wants that stuff in their backyard.